State v. Hullinger

                                   746

 Submitted December 6, 2019; remanded for resentencing, otherwise affirmed
                             January 15, 2020


                  STATE OF OREGON,
                   Plaintiff-Respondent,
                             v.
           KOEL DOUGLAS ALAN HULLINGER,
                   Defendant-Appellant.
               Lincoln County Circuit Court
                   18CR28845; A168355
                               

   Paulette E. Sanders, Judge.
   Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, and Mary M. Reese, Deputy Public Defender, Office
of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
    Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney General,
filed the brief for respondent.
  Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and
Mooney, Judge.
   PER CURIAM
   Remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
Cite as 

 (2020)                            747

        PER CURIAM
         Defendant was convicted of unlawful use of a motor
vehicle, ORS 164.135, and menacing, ORS 163.190. On appeal,
he challenges the trial court’s imposition of several special
conditions of probation in four assignments of error: that
he not use or possess alcoholic beverages, that he not enter
establishments serving alcohol except for employment and
meals, that he live with his mother and follow house rules
imposed by his mother, and that he complete schooling for
and obtain a General Equivalency Diploma. Defendant did
not preserve the asserted errors as to the latter two conditions, but he argues that those errors are plain and that
we should exercise our discretion to correct them. The state
concedes that the two alcohol-related special conditions
of probation were erroneously imposed and that the case
should be remanded. See State v. Borders, 

,

 (2018) (court erred in imposing alcohol-related
conditions of probation for offense that were not reasonably
related to crime of conviction). We agree with the parties
that the two alcohol-related conditions of probation were
unauthorized and were imposed in error, accept the state’s
concession regarding the first and second assignments of
error, and remand for resentencing. Given our disposition of
the first two assignments of error, we need not reach defendant’s third and fourth assignments.
        Remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.